fireemblemfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Character infobox image
An anon proposed using tabber for images from different canonical games. As this will affect a large bunch of pages, I want to collect everyone's opinions regarding this matter. Silence = neutral, your opinion will be entirely up to the result here. I personally agree with this, considered that this will not cause any harm, in contrast, it actually gives a better view of a character's different designs from canonical games. The only drawback I could think of is the amount of tabs would make the infobox go ugly, which can easily be solved by using abbreviations (see preview). Note that this will only apply to official artworks from canonical games, DLC/Spotpass/Heroes/Artbook artworks are excluded. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 16:21, April 30, 2017 (UTC) :I'm not against the idea, it would be useful for characters who've made several appearances under different guises (Briggid/Eyvel, Camus/Zeke/Sirius), but I'm wondering how feasible it would be, especially with characters who've made canonical appearances in a lot of games (Marth, Caeda and Tiki wold have artwork from 4 games, 5 if you count TMS). There're also characters who have more than one artwork from a single game; Elincia has her art as an NPC and as Princess Crimea from Path of Radiance in addition to her art from Radiant Dawn. You also said that "DLC/Spotpass/Heroes/Artbook artworks are excluded", but what about Anna, Owain, Inigo and Severa, since those are their only depictions from their appearances in Fates? And with remakes would we include original and updated art? Or just the updated art? I think before we make a decision we really need to iron out the details. Are You Serious (talk) 17:14, April 30, 2017 (UTC) If you allow me, I want to share my two cents. First, I discussed this with Otherarrow, but it never went forward for whatever reason. I brought it back because not only a bunch of other wikis do this already, but it personally feels frustating to scroll the entire page to see an artwork from a previous entry. As for some of the questions previously mentioned, it should go along those lines. The remake rule still counts: Even though characters like Marth have canonically appeared 4 times or so, the old artworks simply doesn't hold up as a point of reference anymore. Awakening introduces a character that look like remake Marth, not pantless marth. The same thing goes for generic looking Alm and warrior princess Celica. We may want to put them in the infobox, but if anything, it will be more for the sake of curiosity than anything else, same as the spin-off artworks. The importance of other artworks: Its true that games like PoR have more than one artwork for certain characters, but you have to consider their importance as well. Dress Elincia makes up a majority of the game while her armored design doesn't show up until almost the end of the campaign. We also should exclude things like kid characters like young Roy and Lilina and baby Lucina because it doesn't necessarily do much in terms of story. Even in SoV, the child characters appear only once in order to show the growth of said characters when their story actually begins. Awakening Trio and Anna: About actual awakening characters in fates(unlike those cheap birthright children copies), the only thing to be done is to wait for them to release the game's artbook. You may argue it may not come, but we actually have seen Owain's artwork in his Odin persona, so we have to assume they're just being lazy with it(not even Kozaki knows when its gonna come out). The tellius artbooks, for instance, were released last year, while the games launched in the mid-late 2000's. Anna is probably the sole exception of the whole thing, since its stated all of them are different persons, though extremely similar to one another. We should probably follow the most recent appereance rule on this one. And there you have it. One thing I'd like to add however, is that we may want to use abbreviations of the titles whenever possible, like PoR or RD, since the numbering of titles can be somewhat messy at times. Of course, I want to her other people's opinion on this as well.-- 20:24, April 30, 2017 (UTC) :First off, I have to remind the anon that we're not done with the discussion here, wait for a week for other ppl to read and share their opinions, don't be hasty and make inconsistent changes that would cause more work fixing them. :*Anyway, back to the topic, Marth/Caeda/Tiki etc. have appeared in quite many games, though I think it shouldn't be a problem, appearance in 4 canon games, they all should be put in the infobox if we were to do, why would we exclude artworks from older games now that they got remakes? People tend to compare these types of artworks more than being curious about the different look of a character from FE10 and FE9. Simply put, we should include both original and remake artworks for FE1, 2, 3. :*Are You Serious did bring up an important point, what we do about games that have more than 1 official artworks? You can say Elincia's princess artwork is more important, so we use it for infobox, valid enough, but then, Marth has 2 artworks in FE12, and based on what standard we can say which one is more important? :*I agree with the anon for Anna, Awakening trio cases. :*As for abbreviations, how is numbering of titles messy? You have only considered PoR and RD so far, what do you suggest as abbreviations for FE1, FE2, FE3... You can't just use PoR/RD for Tellius characters and FE6/FE7 for Elibe characters. It is inconsistent and I don't recommend that. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 00:00, May 1, 2017 (UTC) ::Would it be possible to put a tabber within a tabber? That could resolve the Elincia-and-characters-in-similar-situation issue (They can do it on the MegaTen wiki). Another issue that came to mind is how we determine the order, would it go by first appearance, most recent appearance, first playable appearance, or chronological order? Are You Serious (talk) 04:47, May 1, 2017 (UTC) ::I'm for this, I feel while it's a little more work on our parts, it could make the experience a lot more pleasant for the everyday wiki-goer. I say yay. GreatDane112 (talk) 05:38, May 1, 2017 (UTC) :::We got more supports, that's great news. I don't really like nested tabbers, so I came up with a different method but presumably, a better result. Follow these steps to see the preview in my sandbox: go to MediaWiki:Common.js, hit "Enter test mode" on the right rail, then go to my sandbox. Thoughts? -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 12:11, May 1, 2017 (UTC) :::I forgot to mention, the order, obviously should be from older to newer games, in other words, from first to most recent appearance, left to right. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 12:14, May 1, 2017 (UTC) Sorry for the delay, but to answer Khang's question, we might want to follow Heroes and use a standing artwork instead of an attacking one. Also, we might want to set up the tabber to show the most relevant artwork, in Marth's case being his new mystery artwork.-- 16:52, May 1, 2017 (UTC) :Sounds logical enough. Though I don't get your latter sentence. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 23:39, May 1, 2017 (UTC) Seems like there's no other issue or objection, we can roll out the changes. To summarize the current status: ;What to do? :We will start making adjustments to character infoboxes, adding tabber to those that have artworks in multiple games in the main series line, this excludes artworks from DLC/Spotpass/Heroes/Artbook (artbooks that are not confirmed to contain official artworks used in game). ;How to do? :This requires experience editing in source mode, refer to to learn more. An example can be seen in my sandbox. :Please edit in order by game, and using these template for others to keep track of which pages have been edited. If more questions or any issue arises while editing, please discuss it here. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 03:47, May 7, 2017 (UTC) Sorry for the late comment, but there's the issue of the artwork that'll appear standard in the page before selecting in the tabber. For example, in the marth page, it'll show the FE1 look instead of the FE12 design, which isn't in line with the more current design. Should we alter the one that appears as standard?-- 05:55, May 7, 2017 (UTC) :The most recent design rule does not apply to these infoboxes anymore, it's one of the reasons I considered for setting up tabbers at first. Tabbers would eventually overwrite that rule in most cases I believe, so no need to alter the order. On the other hand, with this order, you can see how the arts have evolved through years, we good? -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 08:06, May 7, 2017 (UTC) I'm not quite sold yet on this proposal. This general issue has been brought up in various forms over the years, but one thing is for sure - remakes, spin-offs, and crossovers in the past 5 years have further complicated the situation. So, I can see why people want this. As of right now, I feel that our original policy and it's accompanying exceptions are adequate enough. However, I'd like to hear more from others so that I may form, possibly, a broader opinion on the matter. I would like to see a vote tabulation template used here by an admin, like I saw on the Vesperia Saga question, to get a better feel on where people stand.--Aivass Remurias (talk) 00:32, May 10, 2017 (UTC) I'm very interested on what Nauibotics feels about this proposal. I have respect for this user's background in character pages specifically. Additionally, I would really like to see what Otherarrow, Morose Lark, and Thenewguy34 think about this discussion.--Aivass Remurias (talk) 00:50, May 10, 2017 (UTC) If we limit it to solely canonical series, with non-DLC, non-spinoff, and non-amiibo art, it may seem plausible, but then we have to deal with characters like Catria and Camus that show up in now six different canon Fire Emblem games. For someone like Ike, this seems plausible, but I am not completely sure if the template can stand up to having six different pieces of artwork for four specific characters (Camus, Catria, Palla, Est). I am not entirely sure on how to respond to Aivass' point on remakes, spin-offs, and crossovers, though my current guess is only to include remake art in the character infobox template. I will abstain from voting until I have formed an absolute opinion (hopefully I do not forget about this discussion though, so that may not be absolute either). --Thenewguy34 16:58, May 11, 2017 (UTC) :Okay, after looking at this on certain pages, I see absolutely no reason why need to make this change. I am fine with the status quo and making this change only makes things look more complicated, especially in regards to pages like Catria, Tiki, and Camus that have multiples pieces of official artwork due to showing up in more than two titles. --Thenewguy34 20:33, May 11, 2017 (UTC) I have a few doubts about the tabber order: Chronological order: Normally, this doesn't occur, but shouldn't FE7 art appear before FE6? After all, the characters don't have much of a focus like the 2nd gen in FE6(Karel in particular appears almost at the end of the game). Plot relevance: This isn't as bothersome, but it should be taken into consideration. Sothe, for example, doesn't have much of a focus in Path of Radiance as in Radiant Dawn. Thus, we should consider what is the most appropriate artwork to be shown. Remake vs. original: I've seen some character pages changing the tabber order, and I'll admit I did some of them, if only because I believe the artwork order still prevail. I mean, the villager and whitewings group artworks aren't necessarily appropriate for a character specific page. I may have said this before, and I know the most recent design rule may not apply for a tabber, but we really should consider their role in it.-- 14:41, May 15, 2017 (UTC) :Why do we have to make things complicated? It's pretty simple for me, artwork of the game that comes out first appears on the first tab, second on the second tab, and so on. Does it look plausible to have the order such as: "FE15 | FE13 | FE12 | FE2", or even worse: "FE15 | FE2 | FE12 | FE13"? No, I don't think so. It really does not matter what you see first on the page, because we used a "tabber", readers want to see more recent arts? simply click on the next tabs. How does that sound? -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 15:06, May 15, 2017 (UTC) What about group artworks on character specific pages?-- 16:01, May 15, 2017 (UTC) :They're still official artworks, we can't separate them, so I decided to add them. I don't see any reason why not, if you have a good reason, let's here it. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 07:01, May 16, 2017 (UTC) It really does matter which image appears first on the page, tabbers or not. Otherwise, there is no consistency and the most relevant image may not be the default. That also affects which tab links have to be put in the box, which could vary depending on what the default image is. This topic always starts the same way: a new user goes to a character page and does not like it that their preferred image of the character is not in the top box. This would affect thousands of pages, and I also do not think it is a good idea to have some images of the character hidden by tabs where you have to click multiple times to see all of them. It is much better to have all the images on one screen, with the default image at the top, and the rest in the gallery. The proposal also does not address the many exceptions such as characters that appear in disguise, use an alias, Anna, SpotPass/DLC, Briggid/Eyvel, Camus/Zeke/Sirius, Marth/Shiida/Tiki, Owain/Inigo/Severa. Our existing policy covers all of that quite well, and is much more simple. If the anonymous user does not get their favored image of a character on the top, oh well. We already have a good standard. We also still have yet to hear from some key people.--Aivass Remurias (talk) 12:57, May 24, 2017 (UTC) :First of all, I already mentioned at the very start that "silence = neutral", waited for a whole week, and even tried to bring this discussion to as many people as I can (by writing a new JS script for a notification feature, which was entirely absent from our wiki as Otherarrow did not permit the new Forum feature supported by Fandom/Wikia to be enabled). So your last sentence doesn't get through my head. About the tab order, I assume I've come up with a good enough compromise as seen in Evacino's blog. And what to be address of the exceptions you mentioned? All the changes have been applied, what did you see that didn't work for you? Our policy did cover well, but as the series progresses, we get more readers, more opinions so there will be changes, changes that would benefit the majority, not just a few individuals. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 13:20, May 24, 2017 (UTC) Votes